• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.

Deleted member 12790

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
24,537
That's where I'm lost because I said Valve has a platform to R&D and other R&D sinks... and that they don't have a console to R&D. I'm not sure what part he disagreed with.

It stems from you, and others in this topic, not really knowing what a "gaming platform" actually is. The money Valve spends developing Steam, is very comparable to the money Sony and Microsoft and such spend on their consoles. Actually, a better example would be the kind of money valve spends on steam is comparable to the money microsoft spends on WINDOWS, and DIRECTX, and VISUAL STUDIO and so forth. You know, microsoft's actual largest money sinks, which cost more than their console development.
 

Armaros

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,901
The new hotness of 2019 is to take your game off a storefront that's taking a 30 percent cut and put it on your own store and/or one that's offering a better rate and in a lot of cases upfront money. Unless Ubisoft decides to throw their hat into the hardware arena they don't have that type of leverage on consoles.

Again hardware being the nominal excuse for only targeting one company in particular. I still dont see any games on EGS exclusive just for the 18% cut. Can you show any examples of developers doing this for the 30 vs 12% cut and not the EGS upfront moneyhats?

And people hear complain about hearing the same argument from people against EGS, and your argument isn't even right. Zero developers have moved to EGS for a better rate, they ALL moved because of other payments for an exclusvity or not-on-steam contract.
 

Crayon

Member
Oct 26, 2017
15,580
That's where I'm lost because I said Valve has a platform to R&D and other R&D sinks... and that they don't have a console to R&D. I'm not sure what part he disagreed with.

They don't have a console to r&d, but they have a lot of their own (often less like their own, and more like for everybody) stuff to r&d that console holders don't.
 

Static

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
6,107
Krejlooc I will never not love your posts. Please keep being awesome. Please don't get baited into bans by people who just refuse to get it. I really enjoy you being part of this community. God damn this shit is interesting and informative.
 

a916

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,816
It stems from you, and others in this topic, not really knowing what a "gaming platform" actually is. The money Valve spends developing Steam, is very comparable to the money Sony and Microsoft and such spend on their consoles. Actually, a better example would be the kind of money valve spends on steam is comparable to the money microsoft spends on WINDOWS, and DIRECTX, and VISUAL STUDIO and so forth. You know, microsoft's actual largest money sinks, which cost more than their console development.

None of this information is public since they're a private company so where exactly are you getting these numbers?
 

ShinUltramanJ

Member
Oct 27, 2017
12,949
Yeah its almost like EGS operating at 88/12 finally opened publisher and developer eyes that that is what the standard cut across the board should be. Just because 70/30 has been the standard forever doesn't mean it should be.

That's the narrative for sure. In the real world developers took the money EGS was waving in their faces.

The 88/12 split meant little, and swayed no one.
 

Armaros

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,901
Yeah its almost like EGS operating at 88/12 finally opened publisher and developer eyes that that is what the standard cut across the board should be. Just because 70/30 has been the standard forever doesn't mean it should be.

I guess why there are so many examples of devs that went EGS only with only the 12% cut as the reason?

Wait? Not a single one?

Odd, but you said the 30% cut is the reason why they all left.
 

eonden

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,078
None of this information is public since they're a private company so where exactly are you getting these numbers?
Because you can easily track the number of commits done by Valve employees / Valve supported devs in projects because most of them are open-source and in github.
 

Armaros

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,901
I'm sorry I don't care that some gamers think they have an inherent right to pay as little as possible for every single game. I'd rather have developers have stability through exclusivity deals like Epic, as opposed to the morass that is Steam, where nobody wants to pay more than $5 for any non-AAA game.



You don't understand - developers should be overjoyed that Steam allowed them to make all this money, via their charity and love of an open marketplace and that any developers who go to EGS hate gaming and are just greedy.

"Poorer people in not-western countries dont deserve to play video games" - You.
 

Nome

Designer / Self-requested ban
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
3,312
NYC
So, story time about Valve's VR hardware: they literally gave it away for free to Oculus. It's amazing how no big gaming publications have ever tried to investigate this story. Look at who left Valve for Oculus during the facebook buy out. The story goes like this: When John Carmack at Quakecon showed off "carmack's VR headset" (which was Palmer Luckey's duct tape prototype) Valve hit him up as they'd already been doing R&D on their own VR hardware with Michael Abrash for a couple of years. They had two teams working on what they considered the *Reality projects: One lead by Abrash, which became their VR division, and one lead by Jerri Elsworth, who was developing an AR solution. Valve decided to back their VR solution, and as such let Elsworth keep all of her valve-funded, valve-developed research and development and take it to her own company (which is amazing on its own).

But back to VR -- Valve hit up Luckey and Carmack and offered to share their solution because they flat out didn't want to enter the hardware market. They needed a big player to take their tech and run with it, so they could have a market to sell with. Valve basically defined modern VR. You can look at the list of features their early headset had, that Oculus cribbed. For example, the constellation tracking system of the rift? It came from Valve, valve was prototyping 10 different types of tracking solutions at the time. Their constellation system was the last one Oculus got to see before they split, which is why Vive uses the more advanced Lighthouse tracking where Oculus went with the older constellation tracking.

I tried their headset at Dev Days, where it was known as "The Valve Room." This was way, way before even the DK2 had been announced. They already had a dual screen, 1080p per eye VR headset with full roomscale tracking and asynchronous reprojection going. Like, 2 full years before Oculus released the DK2. The Oculus rift DK2 and CV1, to an enormous degree, looks like a commercial version of "The Valve Room"

So back to the story about Oculus: There was actually conflict at valve between VR team members over whether or not they should share their technology completely free with Oculus. Valve quite literally gave their tech to Oculus, no strings attached. When Mark Zuckerberg was shown a prototype at Oculus' office as a pitch for facebook to buy them out, they showed them the Valve room and not the DK2. Zuckerberg literally thought, when he bought oculus, that he bought valve's technology. When he learned that they didn't have the team, or the exact demo he tried, they tried to buy out valve, and when they couldn't, they tried to poach the VR team. Maybe I shouldn't share this stuff as it's really contentious, but those who stay told me that the people who left for big raises at Oculus, are the same people who had been arguing prior that Valve should give their tech away to oculus for free.

Anywho, Facebook's attempt to poach Valve's VR division actually didn't work, with the vast majority of the VR division staying and working to this day. They cross over into other R&D, as to "power" their VR technology, they had to simultaneously prop up technologies like dx2vk (in fact, their VR conference is WHERE they announced dx2vk, during their "use our free tools for gamedev" lecture), sdl2, etc.

Valve has the single most recouped R&D costs in the entire VR market. They literally charged absolutely nothing for their R&D.
That's an interesting take on the story. I've never understood it as Valve giving away their tech, but rather that a few Valve employees abused the company's flat hierarchy to effectively steal tech for a big payday.
 

Crayon

Member
Oct 26, 2017
15,580
That 88% split looks so good that I wanted to jump right on it.

But I have to wait for epic to call me. I'm going to do everything I can to get up there on Steam's most wanted list before release. Fortune favors the prepared.
 

Dog of Bork

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,988
Texas
They don't have a console... I'm not sure where I lost you on that.
It's a disingenuous (or worthless, take your pick) point to make. Not having a line item for "console R&D" is completely irrelevant in the discussion of R&D costs for Valve compared to its competition. The costs of improving the PC space and their own platform are not diminished by not having a plastic box.
 

BeI

Member
Dec 9, 2017
5,974
They sure do. It was actually a problem for a while. Certain "developers" would flood the market with trash asset flips filled with trading cards, give away the game keys for free, and rake in a lot of money on card sales. Rules have tightened up a bit since then though.

So is it part of the small percentage taken off of each card sale that devs get 70% of or what? I wonder how much it ultimately adds up to tho; surely can't be too much.
 

Alvis

Saw the truth behind the copied door
Member
Oct 25, 2017
11,224
Spain
This guy can say whatever he wants. In the end, you'll have to put your games where players are. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 

Crayon

Member
Oct 26, 2017
15,580
Honest question, should Steam be treated as a separate plateforme? As in, just like a PS4, a Switch or an Xbone?

I think so yeah. It would be a fuzzy line, but as Xbox and Playstation expand out to include streaming services, PC support, etc, I'm sure they will still be considered a platform as much as they ever were.

Perhaps more importantly, the politics around it here are just like a console except for tending to run more wild west style.
 

eonden

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,078
So is it part of the small percentage taken off of each card sale that devs get 70% of or what? I wonder how much it ultimately adds up to tho; surely can't be too much.
The fees are 5% to Valve, 10% to the developer (so technically the developer gets 10/15=66%), capped to a minimum of 1 cent for each (so the lowest price possible is 0.03 where the seller, Valve and dev get 1 cent each).
 

Fularu

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,609
I think so yeah. It would be a fuzzy line, but as Xbox and Playstation expand out to include streaming services, PC support, etc, I'm sure they will still be considered a platform as much as they ever were.

Perhaps more importantly, the politics around it here are just like a console except for tending to run more wild west style.
I'm fine with that. Should the port begging rules apply to Steam too then?
 

Tart Toter 9K

Member
Oct 25, 2017
397
Let's not forget how Valve will fund VR games without asking for exclusivity.

However, Newell added that Valve will not expect devs to release their games on the Vive at all, if they don't want to.
"There are no strings attached to those funds," he continued. "They can develop for the Rift or PlayStation VR or whatever the developer thinks are the right target VR systems

Chances are a bunch of those VR games people are playing on their PSVR's and Rifts were directly funded by the 30% 😉
Edit: You just don't see Valve beat their chest whenever they do something good for gamer brownie points
 

Deleted member 12790

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
24,537
I want to tell a story about what development tools mean to small developers who can't really afford to spend literally years making their own tools. Buddy of mine, Matt Philips, dude behind tanglewood, was talking one day about how awesome Visual Studio is for his homebrew Dreamcast development:



And if you've never developed for a console like that, especially an old one, what he's showing is insanely cool. That's super slick GDB integration, looks all pretty seamless. But talking to him more privately, he went with Visual studio to do this, because he thought visual studio was the only IDE with such capabilities. Keep in mind, a professional copy of Visual Studio costs $500 for a stand alone license, per computer.

So here's MY setup:

EDFp24BXUAABDg6


Same slick feature set, same integrated IDE, only difference? This is being made using entirely free software, most of which has been propped up by valve funding.

You guys don't understand how much of valve's fingers are everywhere in game dev, and how much money they save me as a developer. They make some best in class tools, and release them for completely free. It's insane.
 

icecold1983

Banned
Nov 3, 2017
4,243
User Banned (3 days): Drive by trolling, history of infractions for similar posts.
Its always funny reading these threads and wondering what type of skittles and rainbows world resetera thinks this is
 

Static

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
6,107
Honest question, should Steam be treated as a separate plateforme? As in, just like a PS4, a Switch or an Xbone?
Eeeh. A lot of what Steam develops isn't exclusively for Steam's benefit is the thing. They've been either magnanimous or strategically very generous with their tech. They have been a high tide that has raised a lot of boats on PC, and very deliberately so. If you don't have to use Steam to benefit from their work, I don't think it's an argument for treating them identically to PS4 Switch and Xbone. Which isn't to say they shouldn't be, I just don' think that the fact that steam develops tech is a good reason. Heck, Epic develops tech too. So many developers develop tech. Maybe... Maybe we just acknowledge that we don't live in a world of absolutes, and that as time goes on, games are getting delivered in more and more diverse ways, and putting platforms into neat little categories, whether that's a console or "just a digital distribution platform", just isn't that important.
I'm fine with that. Should the port begging rules apply to Steam too then?
Like, this isn't that important. We're just discussing to what degree platform warring should be allowed on this forum. Pardon my slight disrespect for the rules of this community, but who fucking cares? That's just etiquette, man. Small potatoes.
 

Deleted member 12790

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
24,537
None of this information is public since they're a private company so where exactly are you getting these numbers?

I actually know and talk to lots and lots of valve employees. For example, they used me to populate their steam controller profile listings before the controller released. To do so, they granted me a special ability on steam where every single item on the store was free to me. Instead of a "buy" button, I had an "add to account" button on steam for me. The reason they were doing this, is because they needed some people to go through all of steam's library and populate default steam controller configs before they launched so it wouldn't be barren on launch day. I talk to many members of the Steam Controller team -- whose work made it into VR mind you -- to this day.

I also went to Dev Days and know a lot of these people I'm talking about personally. Alan Yates used to be a regular on r/oculus and we spoke super often. I run a VR conference, I founded a VR developers group in Houston. I go to IGDA meetings as a card carrying member where I talk to other game devs, information gets around. Like, I know Ryan Gordon. On top of talking to him directly, he has also said in podcasts where he gets his funding. He's super open about valve literally propping up his salary. You can see valve's commits on dx2vk, it's public. The dude behind renderdoc talks about how his openGL debugging is literally based on VOGL from valve, and how valve is the entire reason his program took it to another step. In other words, I know because I'm involved in this world.

So now, back to you - where are YOU getting this info that they don't spend as much as Sony, Microsoft, etc?
 

Fularu

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,609
If "cant wait for X to come to consoles" gets banned too. Go ahead.
This isn't what I'm asking. I'm specifically talking about « No Switch version? No buy! » which has plagued this forum for a while (not speaking about Steam specifically but about the Switch, the Steam issue is older and for whatever reason, completely tolerated)
 

a916

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,816
I actually know and talk to lots and lots of valve employees. For example, they used me to populate their steam controller profile listings before the controller released. To do so, they granted me a special ability on steam where every single item on the store was free to me. Instead of a "buy" button, I had an "add to account" button on steam for me. The reason they were doing this, is because they needed some people to go through all of steam's library and populate default steam controller configs before they launched so it wouldn't be barren on launch day. I talk to many members of the Steam Controller team -- whose work made it into VR mind you -- to this day.

I also went to Dev Days and know a lot of these people I'm talking about personally. Alan Yates used to be a regular on r/oculus and we spoke super often. I run a VR conference, I founded a VR developers group in Houston. I go to IGDA meetings as a card carrying member where I talk to other game devs, information gets around.

So now, back to you - where are YOU getting this info that they don't spend as much as Sony, Microsoft, etc?

Cool, sounds like you're in the know then.
 

Armaros

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,901
This isn't what I'm asking. I'm specifically talking about « No Switch version? No buy! » which has plagued this forum for a while (not speaking about Steam specifically but about the Switch, the Steam issue is older and for whatever reason, completely tolerated)

Uh they are literally the same if you are considering everything a platform.
 

Dog of Bork

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,988
Texas
They don't have a console... I'm not sure where I lost you on that.
I'm gonna come back to this to tell you exactly where you "lost me".

You responded to this post
Consoles also have to provide hardware and software. Steam just has to provide software so there is significantly less overhead I would think.
With this
Also Valve isn't sinking massive amounts of R&D into these consoles.
Which is true, but not particularly insightful. You then said the following when someone said Valve has a massive R&D budget of its own:
I'm not saying they don't have R&D money sinks... they still have a platform to R&D as well. Sony/Microsoft have a pretty significant one that Valve doesn't
Which is technically true but completely worthless to the conversation. They may be missing this one line item, but they have substantial resources devoted to R&D in other areas that Sony and MS don't. The implication of your posts is that R&D for console manufacturers is higher than Valve, which is not a position that is supported by your posts.

Clarify your messages if this was not your intent.
 

Cactuar

Banned
Nov 30, 2018
5,878
Again hardware being the nominal excuse for only targeting one company in particular. I still dont see any games on EGS exclusive just for the 18% cut. Can you show any examples of developers doing this for the 30 vs 12% cut and not the EGS upfront moneyhats?

And people hear complain about hearing the same argument from people against EGS, and your argument isn't even right. Zero developers have moved to EGS for a better rate, they ALL moved because of other payments for an exclusvity or not-on-steam contract.

Why are you calling hardware an excuse? Ubisoft can take their games of steam and put them on their own storefront, they can not do that with hardware because they don't make consoles. That's not called an excuse, that's called a fact.

And who are you to say ZERO developers have moved to Epic for a better rate, have you spoken to all of them? I'm sure there are a lot of factors while one moves on and I would say it varies from developer to developer. You speak as if they are all some hive mind. Developers make the moves they make for business reasons, so certainly a more favorable cut plays a part of that decision making process.
 

Nacho

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,108
NYC
I'd love to ask him about the split on consoles, since it's also 70/30...
I mean... consoles are pretty damn different than a PC. I don't see the comparison and that's the point. Any publisher can just invest in their own store nowadays, and if the games are good, customers will follow in spite of the inconvenience of different launchers.

Are you saying that bypassing steam is as easy as Ubi building their own console?
 

JesseEwiak

Banned
Oct 31, 2017
3,781
"Poorer people in not-western countries dont deserve to play video games" - You.

Their right to play a video game isn't more important than the right of developers to make a decent living.

At the end of the day, video games are a luxury good. Plus, in 2019, it's easier than ever to play all the video games you want for free, just not certain video games. Which is fine.
 

Fularu

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,609
Uh they are literally the same if you are considering everything a platform.
No because if a delayed Steam version is announced I don't think this should fall under port begging. Waiting for the Steam (or Switch) version is perfectly valid and fine.

Myself I wait for gog versions because I put maximum value on DRM free features